Ex-Irwin Mitchell Lawyer Struck Off for Dishonesty

Senior Solicitor Struck Off for Pressuring Junior to Lie

A senior solicitor has been struck off the roll after a tribunal found she had deliberately misled an unrepresented party and instructed a junior colleague to perpetuate the falsehood. The case serves as a stark reminder of the paramount importance of honesty, a principle that forms the bedrock of the legal profession in both the UK and Ireland.

Kirsten Tomlinson, who had been a senior associate at Irwin Mitchell since 2020, was found to have committed two acts of dishonesty by the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT). The misconduct occurred during her oversight of a family law matter where the firm’s client was seeking to finalise financial arrangements with her former partner via a consent order.

The day-to-day handling of the case was managed by a paralegal, who had only recently qualified as a chartered legal executive. The client’s former partner was acting as a litigant in person, creating a significant power imbalance that the tribunal noted placed a higher duty of care on the professionals involved.

A Principled Stand Against Deception

The tribunal heard that Ms Tomlinson sent an email to the unrepresented ex-partner, falsely claiming that a court application had already been issued. She then compounded this deception by instructing her junior colleague to maintain the lie in subsequent correspondence.

In an email to the newly qualified legal executive, Ms Tomlinson wrote, “[H]e doesn’t know we haven’t issued… we just led him to believe that we did,” concluding the instruction with a smiling face emoji. This casual approach to such a serious ethical breach was particularly noted.

However, the junior executive felt deeply uncomfortable with the directive. Instead of following the instruction, she demonstrated profound integrity by reporting the matter to a partner at the firm’s Manchester office. Her witness statement conveyed her surprise and unease at being asked to participate in the deception.

No Excuse for Dishonesty

Ms Tomlinson admitted to the allegations of dishonesty. In her defence, she suggested she was acting on her client’s instructions and was frustrated by delays in the case. The SDT firmly rejected these explanations, ruling that neither circumstance could ever justify misleading any party, particularly one without legal representation.

The tribunal concluded that the misconduct was deliberate, calculated, and repeated. It found that Ms Tomlinson had not only been dishonest herself but had also attempted to implicate a junior member of her team in her wrongdoing. Given the gravity of her actions, the tribunal determined that striking her off the roll of solicitors was the only appropriate and proportionate sanction to protect the public and maintain the profession’s reputation. Ms Tomlinson was also ordered to pay £1,000 in costs.